keefy - makes it difficult but thank heavens that the ridiculous idea of making the resrictions even stronger was dropped afet 50%+1 was rejected. I think 50%+1 will pass next time with the new DTB having realised it has to be presented in a better manner than it was.

Keefy - it did stop us from permitting the DTB to sell down 50%+1 last time, but it's not as challenging as had the Super RA gone through. I believe that a more trusted DTB, with a bit more effort, would see 50%+1 pass reasonably comfortably.

Doesn't our "restrictive actions" threshold stop us from taking any sort major decisions.

A huge proportion seem to be in the "yeah, it seems like a good idea, so long as somebody else pays for it" camp. That's partly why I'm glad to see the current DTB are being much more honest about our financial situation. I don't particularly want us to lose fans ownership, but equally I will be pretty surprised if we can sustain another decade of it without some sort of significant, unexpected windfall.

Lol, [Link]

KD- of course to some extent that’s the test - whether people are willing and able to pay extra to fund us being fan-owned, which is why we need to be up-front and see whether there is a real appetite for fan ownership or whether it’s just a case of “yeah, it seems like a good idea, so long as somebody else pays for it”.

A majority of respondents to the last survey KD and maybe it is time for another survey but that isn't my decision. I would be sure that there are plenty who want to remain fan owned even if you personally are not of their number and I wonder how sustainable it is.

OI - You say: 'It is no good saying we want to be fan owned but we won't give up anything to benefit the club.' Who is saying we want to be fan owned, please?

I'm sure I will be corrected if any of this is wrong, as I have been on other occasions. I believe that when we started all STs were paid up front. Soon after that Early Bird discounts arrived so that the club had a base of ST money to get through the close season. Next it was clear that not all could afford to pay in one go so we introduced DDs but not for Early Bird as the club really needed some up front money for cash flow. That seemed a very reasonable mix of offers. At some later point it changed that you could get both Early Bird and DD, which really counteracted the point of Early Bird for the club. That has now been rescinded and of course people who had benefiitted are unhappy at losing an offer. Yes maybe it could have been explained better. However it is no good saying we want to be fan owned but we won't give up anything to benefit the club. And of course if we had a majority owner he/she/they could do away with Early Bird, DD, concessions or anything else and all we could do is moan or not go.

Rory Sutherland would say be honest in this case. Throw our hands up and say 'We've taken a foolish path where we think fan ownership is the end, not the necessary means that it actually was. But we can't afford it anymore, so we gonna have to stiff you for a few quid in order to sign a decent striker. Hopefully they won't be a dud like Josh Kelly. Hope that helps.'

Mav- I didn't take it that way, it's more the principle and how it looks for people who have stumped up during difficult times now being treated less favourably than those that didn't. It's an awful look in my mind

The whole “early bird/DD” thing seems to be more optics than anything else, but optics matter. Maybe it would have been better to just front up on the situation and say that, as per the recent meeting, we have a big loss that we have to fill and that the price of being fan-owned (ie because there is nobody other than the supporters to cover the losses) is that we as supporters have to pay more for season tickets (and hence we just do away with early bird discounts for everyone, rather than just those who can’t afford to pay up front). Maybe I am too idealistic, but I always think that telling the truth is better than trying to hide things under complexity and marketing speak, which is probably why I worked in finance rather than sales...

We shouldn’t rely on Broncos. They’re serial losers. Look at their history

Saveloy- I agree that the Broncos deal is one of the bigger “small things” to fill our profitability gap, and even £0.2M is very welcome, but of course the loss which we are reporting for last year was already including that income. So, in the best case, if Broncos do get back to Super League and don’t move grounds again, all that does is to stop things getting worse for us, so that we don’t lose the income that we had, rather than moving us in the right direction.

ST holders also got to watch all the home bcd matches online I think?

5% off a seson ticket or if you don't have a season ticket you can be assured of that seat for individual matches if you buy the ticket early enough. It was effectively though a donation to help through Covid, much the same as buying shares always has been.

Changing - Just for clarity, I wasn't trying to suggest that it's 'only' £30. There seemed to be some confusion earlier as to what the discount is and, as I had a look at this recently and did the calculation, I thought it might help add some clarity. I wasn't being judgy.

Debentures, I have one. Forgotten, what can I use it for now?

I was thanked several times for taking a debenture and I'm thanked each year by a 5% discount on my ticket.

KD - Needless to say it certainly isn't intended as punishment. Unfortunately the pressure for difficult decisions like this (which no-one would have made out of choice) is coming from the unsustainable nature of the club's finances and the need to find an extra £1 million a year at least. I'll confess to not having read Rory Sutherland but, having just checked it out online, I'll give it a try.

The mistake was allowing the two discounts together in the first place. Back in the early days DD was only available afetr Early Bird had ended. It is always difficult taking something away, it just should never have been given. I actually think we've held price increases pretty well given rising costs and the demand for tickets so on this occasion I'm happy to praise the club and DTB.

Remember when some of us paid for ST’s during Covid and all we got was a certificate with Jane Lonsdale autograph.

Agree with Kentish, the basic premise of the new ST pricing arrangement feels fine to me (it's certainly normal in almost every other subscription/regular payment people are likely to have) but a lot of the heat could have been taken out by thinking through the announcement and the branding of the different options.

Maverick - In my view the optics are horrendous. Many have invested their hard earned cash in the club in it's hour of need, perhaps also recently rolled over their bond working on the fact they wiil pay their ST by DD. They then find out they can pay by DD but at a higher price then a non investor who just buys an annual season ticket and has some spare cash. May well be only £30 but it's a shit look

Nick - not sure I agree. We aren't going to fill the profitability gap with one or two big things, it's going to be a few dozen smaller things, of which ST pricing and ground share deals are two of the bigger levers.